If Cottonwood Development is Approved by Granite School District
- Granite School District Receives $171,000 today. Project approval increases that to $900,000 per year for 20 years, a 500% increase.
- Beginning in 2031, Granite School District will receive an estimated $4+ million per year.
- Students district-wide will benefit from this tax revenue, not just those on the east side.
- Development of the property will increase the value of the land and existing mall from $30 million to over $550 million by 2014.
- Improving the property will result in an increase in property values in surrounding neighborhoods while sustaining the historic image of the community.
- The project will represent an economic boom to the economy keeping local spending local, expanding the tax base, increasing tax revenue streams, creating new jobs and strengthening the economy.
- The dollars from a TIF district are created without raising taxes and without dipping into the present tax value.
If Cottonwood Development is NOT Approved by Granite District
- Tax revenues from the Cottonwood Mall that go directly to education will be reduced significantly from the current $171,000 figure.
- In a best case, the Cottonwood Mall will remain vacant for at least several more years as General Growth Properties designs a new project type.
- Income tax, property tax and sales tax revenues would also be significantly impacted, resulting in fewer dollars for education, transportation and commercial services.
- Property taxes for all Holladay Residences would naturally increase to make up the difference in lost tax revenues from the now vacant mall property.
- Without infrastructure funding, any project constructed on this site will have the same associated infrastructure costs (flood plain, high water table, bridges, underground utilities, replacement of antiquated utilities and updated building and Seismic codes).
- General Growth Properties’ $500 million will be invested in another community where a more acceptable return can be generated.
29 comments:
It seems that Granite School District would greatly benefit from going ahead with the revitalized Cottonwood Mall project. It would also be a multi-faceted benefit to the community at large.
It seems to me that leaving the property vacant would be a waste of highly valuable space, an eyesore, and may bring unwanted trouble to our neighborhoods in the form of vandalism and other possible crimes.
It is a good idea to develop this property is such a way and I support it. What I didn't see in the mailing I received or on your web site is an explanation of Granite School Districts problem with it. It is all good and well to have lists of all these officials but what is the controversy?
It would help your (our) cause if this were made clear.
I am in favor of the redevelopment of the Cottonwood Mall property. But I do have some questions about the "concessions" that will be made by the residents of the City of Holladay.
- The concessions we are making is in tax increment funds. For those who are unfamiliar with these, it means that the amount of tax that they would pay is being reduced, and in this case will extend to 2031. What is the total value of these concessions? How many millions are we actually giving up. Sure we get additional sales tax revenue, etc. But is the bottom line negative or positive?
- So in 2031 they will be paying $4m in taxes. Is that also a tax reduction for them?
- In California, 25% of all tax increment funds must be used for the development of low income housing. Is there any kind of restiction or other condition that is being put on these funds which will benefit the community, or are all the funds being left up to the developer's (GGP) discretion?
- Are their any legal commitments being imposed on GGP to complete the project once they start? Holladay has seen other projects started that have ended before they were finished, then later required that the city pay for the demolition. GGP has already had their share of legal problems with issues stemming from their developments. Are we seeing that we will be protected from the developer's self interests that may be harmful to our community?
- Why is GGP insisting that the whole thing be done now? They took their time deciding what they were going to do with the mall. Is this just a scare tactic to make us jump into an agreement that is far less beneficial to us than to GGP. It feels like a 90-minute time-share sales presentation where you must decide now or give up all possibilities to the wonderful offer. Why are they insisting it must happen now? In Hilton Head, are they being told that Holladay might get the development instead of them if they don't bow to the wants of GGP?
- Not to be paranoid, but is there someone locally that is going to be receiving some kind of kickback for helping get this approved? Who is locally behind the big push? Who is going to benefit most from this?
Like I said, I'm all for the development of the Cottonwood Mall property. I want to see it flourish and grow and give value to our community. But I don't want to give away too much to the wrong people. This should benefit Holladay and GGP, not just GGP and a select few locals. Let's get the whole truth out where it can be easily understood and reviewed. I don't want the city to be pressured into accepting terms that allow someone to make a fortune at our expense.
I agree with Cary. We can't just give GGP tens of millions of dollars of our tax revenue without knowing a lot more of the details. What exactly are we supposed to say to the school board and county council without knowing both sides of the story?
Also, I'm not really in favor of the tax increment funding because it would mean giving up our city's tax revenue and getting very little in return, except the removal of an eyesore. All these great descriptions of the walkable neighborhood in the new development do absolutely nothing for Holladay's current residents. The cute neighborhood is for the people who move into it later, not for us. So we're out millions of potential tax dollars, GGP gets tons of money from selling high density housing, and we have to live in a crowded Holladay. Not something I want to give up a dime for.
Likewise, I'm not too thrilled about the shopping center plan. I don't want more quaint, expensive shops that can only be accessed from freezing sidewalks and that I probably have to pay to park at. I want a real mall. Think of the Gateway. It's a fabulous place, but only in the summer. People seem to be forgetting that Utah has serious winters and malls are the perfect solution. Think of the Mall of America in cold Minnesota or the West Edmonton Mall in cold Alberta. Cold places really need real malls. In North Carolina there's a new mall called South Pointe that has a great mixture of indoor and outdoor. With the loss of Crossroads, ZCMI, Valley Fair, and Cottonwood to all become outdoor, Gateway-style shopping centers, I think there's a real market for an enclosed mall and the new Cottonwood should be it. Hopefully it could be done in a way that gives the nice outdoor feel in the summer, while giving the nice heated feel in the winter.
Unless a lot more is done to benefit the current, not future, residents of Holladay, like building something we want (useful, non-boutique stores) and making it more accessible (guaranteed free parking), we shouldn't give any tax breaks. For hundreds of millions of dollars in lost tax revenue they need to really, really accomodate us.
David K. McAllister
In response to David and Cary's Comments, Tax Increment Funding is not "giving up" anything! These tax increment dollars are CREATED and ONLY CREATED from the actual development and investment of GGP’s $550 Million Dollars. This is a COMMON misconception that people have about Tax Increment Funding and the driving force for opposition to Tax Increment Financing. I encourage those of you who are unfamiliar on the concept of this funding method to check out www.ourcottonwood.com to see how it really works. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) uses funds generated by the project itself. These funds do not exist UNLESS the developer (GGP) actually invests the $550 Million first. As a member of the Holladay Chamber of Commerce and as a citizen of Holladay, I have attended dozens of city council meetings and RDA meetings at the city of Holladay, and the proposed development is truly what is BEST for all citizens of Holladay.
Yes, it is precisely giving up tax dollars that we would have had if we didn't make the agreement. Most developments do not have TIF, therefore most developments provide us the tax money that a TIF does not provide.
The assumption you are making is that the land would truly sit idle and useless until 2031 if we didn't give away our taxation rights to GGP right now. I don't believe that. If you're right, then I can see why you would describe it as not giving up money. You see it as the only way to get some tax revenue is to give up most of the tax revenue. That's possible, but unlikely, I think.
I see it as prime real estate that someone will develop fairly soon, whether it be GGP or someone else. I think we can afford to be more prudent and conservative and wait for an agreement that's more advantageous to Holladay's current residents. Hopefully that agreement will be with GGP, but if not, we won't have to wait too long for someone else.
Also, what do you think of the rest of my comments - that the development really doesn't benefit us very; it mostly benefits the residents who will be moving in later?
Dave-
You bring up some great and valid points. You are right that if the proposed development does not go through, it is very unlikely that this piece of land will remain vacant until 2031; but as a resident of Holladay, the alternatives could be more frightful than what is being proposed – this is what we should all be alarmed of. We know an indoor mall (as you mention that you would like to see at this site again) is not a feasible option for this site because of the lack of Freeway access that the other Malls such as Fashion Place, South Towne, etc. and because we have seen that an indoor mall in this location has been easily out positioned. This fact shows that there are really only a few options for this site: it could be all residential, all commercial which most likely would mean BIG BOX such as Target and WalMart, or a mixed-use project as is proposed.
Option1: Let’s just say this site were to be converted to all residential… It would probably only yield a quarter of the potential tax generation because no sales tax would be produced, thus a much lower real-estate value than mixed use. This would be detrimental to the city considering that over the past years almost 50% of the city’s income has come from the mall.
Option 2: If no residential were on the site, the only viable solution would be to build a Big Box center with tenants such as Target, WalMart, etc. Although I’m sure the city would love to have the infusion of sales tax that a big box center would bring, I as well as the Chamber of Commerce do not feel that this would be good for the residence of Holladay and would definitely NOT protect our City’s Charm.
Thus, we are at option 3: The currently proposed mixed-use center. Mixed-Use Outdoor centers are truly where shopping centers in this type of a location are moving towards. I could site hundreds of examples throughout the US in Chicago, New York, Indiana, etc. where the temperatures are even more extreme than Salt Lake and where in these cities and towns outdoor mixed-use centers have been highly successful. Just look at Park City Main Street as even one local example! The proposed Cottonwood Development is EXACTLY what our city needs! A mix of retail and residential in a very upscale manner. The proposed Cottonwood Project protects the charm of our city while still keeping sales tax revenue in the city. If GGP the developer says they cannot build this beautiful half billion dollar town center without Tax Increment Funding, do you really want to take that gamble? If GGP is bluffing, then we win the gambled risk and have a few more tax dollars for the city, but if GGP is telling the truth and this project DOES NOT move forward without TIF Funding, guess who loses in the end? We, as Citizens of Holladay do!!! If this project does not move forward and the land remains vacant for even a few more years, guess what will happen to your personal property tax… it will SKYROCKET! Without Sales Tax, the City would either be forced to cut City Services or it would have to raise Property Taxes of its citizens to counter the loss of Sales Tax from Cottonwood Mall.
Having attended many meetings, the proposed RDA meets ALL of the qualifications that our government has established for RDAs to take place. The majority of the site today sits in the flood plain. Although as you mention it IS PRIME Real-estate, it would cost ANY developer significant amount of money to make the site buildable. The REASON: Back in the 1960’s when this mall was built; you didn’t have to worry about FEMA, flood plains, and seismic requirements. Today, no matter what is built, will require significant INFRASTRUCTURE costs in order to make the land suitable to build on, to bring the entire site out of the flood plain, redo all of the archaic utilities, and bring suitable soil for building. The Tax Increment Funding (TIF) is NOT a handout to the developer, but is a subsidized amount invested for Land Improvements and Infrastructure costs ONLY! The best comparison of Tax Increment Funding is that of monopoly or “play” money. The TIF only exists IF and ONLY IF GGP the developer moves forward and first invests the $550 Million Dollars into Holladay and is specifically generated BY the Cottonwood Development Solely! From all of the budgets, plans, and proposals that have been presented, the Tax Increment Financing is a WIN WIN for the Citizens of Holladay, the Taxing Entities, and the Developer of this project.
I still have not heard a single direct answer to the questions that I posed. Is it because the answers would be detrimental to someone in the City Council, or the Chamber of Commerce? Answers to those questions shouldn't be a problem if there is nothing being hidden.
I'm willing to go along with their plan, as long as there is nothing being hidden from the residents. Most proposals like this talk a big talk, but never get the real questions answered. It's political, so you get people not answering the questions by diverting to another topic.
Cary, the only way we give up money is by this project not moving forward. This plan provides the city, county and school district with the maximum amount of revenue possible. Anyone waiting for a better deal to come forward hasn't done their homework. In 2031, the school district will be receiving more than 5 million per year, not possible with any other plan. Yes, TIF funds are restricted and can only be used for specific purposes. Every developer has legal issues, it's part of the process, but if you look closely at GGP's track record, they deliver on what they promise. If you have been to Vegas recently, you'll notice GGP's hand in several current projects in that city on the Strip. GGP is legit. Why is GGP insisting on doing this now? At least two reasons; the longer the wait, the more expense to the project. Second, GGP wants to use this project as a case study for going GREEN. There are several other locations willing to take on this project and GGP would like to get moving somewhere now. Somewhere is Holladay, Utah, but eventually, the opportunity will pass. The only beneficiaries of this project are the kids in the entire Granite School District, Salt Lake County, Holladay City and just about everyone else. Candidly, other than a few naysayers who oppose this development based on false assumptions, everyone benefits from this plan. There is no kickback or "under the table" deal. This is just a good deal and people who have done their homework know that and don't want to miss the opportunity. Almost 50 public meetings have been held on this project. If there was something fishy, it would be out by now. The one weird thing is that the only group that doesn't get it is the Granite School District board.
ikcujRegarding what you said earlier about outdoor mixed use shopping centers being the trend, I say so what? Just because that's the trend in what developers are developing doesn't mean it's where shoppers would ideally want to shop. There's definitely an attraction that new developments have, so we see shoppers leaving old malls to go to new shopping centers that happen to be outdoor. We saw this with Gateway. But that means the experiment is flawed. Are shoppers going to outdoor shopping centers because they like them outdoors, or because they're new? In my case, it's because Gateway was new. Indoor malls are just plain better in the winter time. Go down to Gateway and ask people on the sidewalk if they wished Gateway were enclosed in the winter. I bet most would.
You say, "The only way we give up money is by this project not moving forward." That's not true. The other way we give up money is losing 60 to 80 million dollars over twenty years if the project does move forward with an unnecessary TIF. As you said earlier, the necessity of the TIF is a gamble and we don't know whether GGP is bluffing. If they are bluffing, we just lost 80% of the monetary benefit of the project. I think they probably are bluffing because they obviously do have the money to build the infrastructure part of their project. $60M is a small amount of the $550M that they're putting up. (Small for them, but not for us.)
Also, developers know that infrastructure is always a part of the cost and they budget for that before they even buy the property. There's nothing special about infrastructure vs. everything else they have to do to build a functioning development. Now, what if I bought a lot next to you to build a house on and I asked for a TIF to pay for the infrastructure cost? Would you be in favor of it? I'd be contributing tax dollars to the city. The city wouldn't have those tax dollars if I didn't build. I'd be raising your property value. Maybe those tax dollars wouldn't happen without my TIF, but they probably would. As a developer I'm not going to gamble on a TIF. Instead I'm going to budget for my infrastructure costs, just like all my other costs.
I think there's some middle ground here. TIFs can be a reasonable thing, but 60 to 80 million is a whole ton of money for us to concede. I think something like 20 million is more fair. Remember, everyone in Holladay is sacrificing for this. We'll have far worse traffic and boutique stores instead of more useful ones, meaning we have to drive farther than we used to to get to useful shopping. Let me reemphasize that the primary beneficiaries of the new development will be the people who live and work there, not the current residents of Holladay.
By the way, hi, I'm Dave McAllister. What's your name?
Thanks,
Dave
Dave, Your posts make too many assumptions that are not true. How are you an expert on shopping trends? You said, "Are shoppers going to outdoor shopping centers because they like them outdoors, or because they're new? In my case, it's because Gateway was new. Indoor malls are just plain better in the winter time. Go down to Gateway and ask people on the sidewalk if they wished Gateway were enclosed in the winter. I bet most would." So, have you done the research to know or are you just making a point without facts, like the few who are opposed to this project do? How do you know that 60-80 million will be given away in the next 20 years? How do you know what GGP is thinking, is bluffing or what their budget projections are? Have you met with them and seen the numbers like the Mayor and City Council? Do you know these people, that the top local execs live in Holladay? How many of the public meetings have you attended? I've been to 10. Are you a developer? You wrote, "Also, developers know that infrastructure is always a part of the cost and they budget for that before they even buy the property." How do you know this? What are your credentials? You wrote, "Remember, everyone in Holladay is sacrificing for this. We'll have far worse traffic and boutique stores instead of more useful ones, meaning we have to drive farther than we used to to get to useful shopping." Guess you missed the meetings on traffic studies that state that traffic will be less with this plan than with any other option (other than an empty lot). The stores haven't even been announced yet, so do you have inside information as to who will be the tenants and who will shop there?
Cary and Concerned have asked some good questions and the responses have been reasonable. I'd recommend that before you continue to write about things you only "know" based on your assumptions, you might want to find out the facts. I've lived in Holladay for 50 years and this project is a no brainer. General Growth has done their homework, the city has made solid decisions based on facts and studies and the only people who continue to oppose this are those who don't have the facts or don't bother to care what the facts are. If you live in Holladay, your elected officials are for this. The Chamber is for this. Few people, other than the same core of 4-5 who come to every public meeting, seem to oppose it based on attendance at those meetings. If you are so correct, why are you among the minority who are wise enough to figure that out? I challenge you to call the mayor's office or the developer. I know they have sat down with people face to face who truly have an open mind on this issue. But if you mind is closed, at least write based on facts, not fiction. But please don't try to confuse people who want to know the facts with things you only assume.
Most of what you label as my assumptions are not assumptions but open questions and guesses. They are items about which no answer is known. For example, I don't have to do research about what kind of shopping center most people want. I only have to know that not everyone wants an outdoor one when it's winter. I am proof by example of that. The 60 - 80 million is based on the numbers on the web site. Once the development is finished about $1M per year in taxes will actually be received. In 2031 the estimate is $4M. In today's dollars, the total difference is about $60M. The way it was phrased elsewhere on ourcottonwood.com it sounded like $4M per year was being applied to the TIF, for a total of about $80M per year. If you have more precise estimates, please share.
If I haven't seen as many numbers as people working on the project, that's not a fault it's just imperfect communication. I had a lot more questions about the numbers but these two web sites have answered about half of them. I'm reasonably satisfied regarding the tax dollar amounts.
How do I know GGP is bluffing? I don't and I specifically said so. Do I know their internal budget projections? None of us do, and that's the point. It's very reasonable to assume that they put wiggle room in their claim that they'll walk away without this exact amount of tax breaks? Most people do so when negotiating.
Who cares where the local executives live? That's almost totally irrelevant to the question of whether a TIF is good for the city or not.
Regarding budgeting, are you kidding me? Do you really doubt that GGP has made a budget that includes infrastructure costs? And yes, I do develop properties. Yes, I and everyone else I've ever met who develops properties makes a budget before making an offer. That's due diligence.
Regarding traffic, I accept the statement that this mixed use plan is less traffic than other options for the future. But the point I was making is that since traffic will be more than it was with the old Cottonwood Mall that's a new burden on us that Holladay City deserves to be compensated for and incoming tax money is the mechanism that does so.
Regarding boutique stores, the intention to target boutique stores WAS announced in the Deseret News about three months ago. If that intention has been changed my wife and I would love to hear it. I wouldn't object to big box stores
I object to your and "Holladay Chamber of Commerce"'s insinuations that anyone who has unresolved concerns or objections is uninformed or closed-minded. Do you honestly believe that no educated, reasonable person can have different tastes, values or experiences that would impact their opinion of this project?
Having said that, let me clarify that I've lived in Holladay for thirty years, and for several years I've looked for a redevelopment of the Cottonwood Mall area. I'm glad to see one coming but I have unresolved concerns. Let me summarize them.
1) While I like most aspects of the plan I don't like the kind of stores they said they're looking for. I would prefer more practical stores, including chain stores. And I would really hope to not to have to pay for parking.
2) I don't trust that a TIF is really required for GGP to do this. When a company asks for a $60M handout we don't have to just take them at face value and hand over the money. We should negotiate for a amount.
Dave
I know Dave and I respect him. He is not someone who just pulls information out of a hat. He is not uninformed.
I got disgusted at the Holladay meetings years ago when I went to a planning commission meeting that decided against a developer's project. In the meeting the commission looked to see whether their decision had any power, and they found that it did not. And in fact the developer got his way on the project, thanks to our city council's jelly spine. So I'm guilty of not finding out more about the meetings on this. But, I'm quite amazed that there has been a meeting almost every week about it and I don't know of a single person who has been to a meeting.
Even someone going to the meetings won't get the whole picture. Politics - the fine art of public deception. Politicians steal more in a month than all the criminals in a year.
Early this afternoon I independently did the same calculations as Dave on the cost of the TIF. I came up with nearly the same figures. I dare say those who don't believe those figures are probably more uninformed than Dave.
I don't want this discussion to digress to us all yelling over the virtual fence at our neighbors. I just want to see the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Is that too much to ask?
An informed public is better than a flock of sheep.
I don't have all the facts and I'm guilty of not going to any meetings. I came to this website after receiving your flyer in the mail. The flyer was a pretty strong piece and forced me off my chair. Invited to this website, I'm wondering where all the information is.
I'd love to see the studies, concerns and ideas for this development posted to your site. The traffic study is of great interest as I am very concerned about the traffic for 4800 S and especially Highland Drive. I grew up in Holladay and our quiet little town is now choking on its traffic. 525 plus residential units......isn't that about 1,000 more cars spilling into a couple of intersections. The mall doesn't bother me, but the number of residential units concerns me. We live off of Highland Drive and it has become more and more difficult to get onto Highland. All you have to do is try to return to Holladay from Wild Oats shopping center on 7200 to get the idea of becoming locked in. The intersection on 7200 is backed up and you can't get across Highland in any sort of busy hour. I've discovered driving through the residential streets to get to another intersection. But isn't that just what the folks on Arbor Lane are worried about?
And as for the threat that our taxes are going to go up..... the value of our property shot up 120K this year alone and the taxes went up with it. Appreciation is dragging our taxes upward. The inadequate infrastructure of Holladay's traffic is going to cost a lot to address and I don't see this being discussed.
As for big boxes, it would be a shame to see them in the neighborhood. And hopefully your plan for an outdoor mall will accommodate the huge number of senior citizens we have in our area. Many of them and parents with small children depended on the mall for a place to walk and shop in the winter. You don't find too many of them at Gateway as it's physically prohibitive.
I suggest that if you have further questions or concerns, you contact the developer or the city. If you don't think a meeting was where the facts were, then go see the developer or our elected officials and pin them down on the facts. That's only fair.
I have attended many of the meetings and can say that the city has done a nice job of holding the developer to a high level of expectation and has listened and acted on citizen concerns. Cary and Paula, all the information you are seeking is available at City Hall or through the developer and has been addressed in public meetings. The traffic study alone is very interesting and shows that this project will mean fewer vehicles around the project than when the mall was fully operational. A Big Box will double traffic from what it was in the mall's best years.
Dave, you seem to be a smart guy, but again, I argue against your opinion when you have come to your conclusions based on guesses. I think we need to stick to facts and leave guesses and assumptions out of the discussion. Things that can't be substantiated should not be part of the discussion. We can agree to disagree on facts, but projecting what people think or assigning motives to their actions without knowledge is not fair to them. Call General Growth. In the public meetings I have attended, in particular the one in early December that all Holladay residents were invited to attend, they were very candid, open to any questions and took time one on one with people. I've attended a fair number of similar meetings and have never seen a developer so open and available to the citizens.
Paula brings up several good points regarding potential traffic issues. We don't need our major roads jammed to the point traffic floods into the surrounding neighborhoods. I would like to see the plans to avoid this. Whatever happens to this land we can't allow a planning disaster like the Fort Union area.
Another concern I have is paying for parking. I am no expert on shopping centers but I do know something about people. Most potential customers would consider it an affront to pay for parking in the suburbs and just wouldn't do it.
I still have not heard anything about the concerns of the Granite School District. I am puzzled as to what this has to do with them.
Oops. I don't know how I managed to miss your post of Dec. 18 regarding the Granite School District but I did. Please disregard my last paragraph of Jan. 3, 5:10 PM.
deadender1, I attended the December 4 public meeting for all residents. A traffic planner hired by the city (not the developer) was there and told us about traffic patterns. I mentioned it in my last post. "The traffic study alone is very interesting and shows that this project will mean fewer vehicles around the project than when the mall was fully operational. A Big Box will double traffic from what it was in the mall's best years."
No traffic will exit or enter on Arbor or Mememory Lanes; everything flows off of Highland and Murray-Holladay, and both streets will be improved to handle new traffic patterns. Seriously, these guys have really thought this project through.
Olyguy, the information you just shared is correct. An independent traffic consultant has determined that this project will create less traffic flow than the original mall and approximately one-third the volume generated by a “Big Box” development.
This whole issue reminds me of the RSL stadium debacle... What's with all these developers squeezing concessions from every community they want to build in... is it because the public thinks they're going to miss out on something?
A few points I would like to make.
1: My property taxes have already gone up in Holladay; they will continue to go up regardless if this property is developed or not.
2: How much revenue has the current mall generated in the last ten years? Not much... I guess we've been living without that revenue anyway. Holladay CoC, you seem to have all the answers... when exactly will my property taxes skyrocket as a result of the mall being closed?
3:The TIF is real money... it has to come from somewhere and it has to go somewhere. Fact: The redistribution of wealth has always been facilitated, very effectively, by politicians.
4: I don't believe in hand outs of any sort. Developers should pay their taxes just like I do. I didn't get TIF for building in Holladay.
5: If I had to pay for parking, I would drive right past the Cottonwood Mall to the indoor Fashion Place Mall! Wait, I almost forgot, I already do drive past the Cottonwood Mall to go to the stores I like.
6: Throwing money at an enterprise has never been a guarantee of success. Has anyone ever thought that any type of mall at that location might not be successful? After all, the demographics have changed in the last 20 years.
7: When I read a post from a public organization such as the "Holladay Chamber of Commerce" I want to know if it was written by committee or by an individual, in either case I would expect a name or names on the post.
8: Olyguy... I wish I were as trusting as you... or as willing to give up my first born to the politicians and developers over this issue you call a "no brainer"! Besides, as a citizen, I don't need any credentials to make assumptions or to ask any questions where my tax money is concerned! It's my right to have questions answered to my satisfaction before I make an informed decision.
9: Personally, I could care less if that site sat vacant for the next 10 years... just as the lot on Murray Holladay road has. The free market will determine the value and viability for that property... we don't need to pay for that to happen, do we?
Props to "Holladay Citizens United" for the mailer. I found the website blog and I now know about the shakedown which GGP is trying to perpetrate on the taxpayers of Holladay. I guess there are always two sides to a story!
Eripii, My trust is based on having spent the time and effort to educate myself before forming an opinion. I agree that questions are fair game and should be asked. I'm not opposed to fact finding. I am opposed to people posting as "facts" things they hope, assume or guess. We can differ on our opinion on how best to encourage economic developoment, but assuming what "people" want or the motives of the city or developer or even the school district isn't constructive to the discussion.
It is certainly a complicated issue, but I am willing to encourage using all the resources available to anyone who jumps through the proper hoops to meet the standards required. I think that has been done in this case and there is evidence to prove that.
Finally, this isn't like RSL at all. That project will only benefit Dave Checketts and the Sandy community about 40 times per year. That's about all the events they will ever anually hold there, despite their "guesses" otherwise. Just watch.
I agree with you, Sandy did act exactly has you feared, "they're going to miss out on something". That stadium could have been built in numerous locations in the Salt Lake Valley with no tax help. The will of the people was thwarted by the Governor.
But, unlike the Sandy stadium, the will of the majority of the people is that the CM project should be approved.
Sure there are downsides. No plan is perfect for everyone. You won't get 100 agreement. You sound like you are a developer so you know this better than anyone. But, this plan has been well thought out. It will ehnance the city in many ways. The Holladay project will benefit the entire community 365 days of the year. I just hope the GSD board does not thwart the will of the people, as the governer did with RSL, and votes against this project.
The reason why the current Cottonwood Mall is a financial failure is due to poor infrastructure and access from a major transportation corridor. It’s not the right location for a traditional mall. The best and highest use is a mixed use project as General Growth has proposed.
I continue to be amazed at some of the questioning going on with this blog by certain individuals. It has been suggested many times to go to city hall or call the developer directly to get the specific information you are looking for and yet it is obvious from the continued comments that this is not happening. Don't get me wrong, I value that people are questioning the project, but then if you are really concerned, get off this blog and start doing your research. Overwhelmingly, those who have done the research support this project.
General Growth has been as open as any developer I have ever seen as it relates to the very questions you are asking. If you do your homework you will also find out that General Growth is one of the most successful and sought after developers in the country. To just make the assumption that they are trying to put one over on us is irresponsible, especially if you have not studied out all of the research.
The argument that people in general would like an indoor mall may be true, but the fact is that a traditional indoor mall does not work there economically. Again, if you would go and do your research you would know that and this line of reasoning would no longer be posted.
As it relates to traffic, the largest portion of traffic congestion in the Fort Union area is a result of traffic generated by the retail businesses. Office and residential projects generate less traffic, so the redevelopment project by General Growth reflecting mixed uses, is a smart and responsible proposed use of the property or as termed in the industry the “highest and best use”. If you go look at the studies, you will come to this conclusion yourself.
In my opinion, if this project does not go forward it is a huge loss to the city, the valley and the state, including Granite School District.
I am just done reading this long list of comments...I hope Ms McKitrick from SLC Tribune is taking notes on these excellent points brought forward by all parties and making these interesting issues more well known to the general community at large.
I have a grandmother living within a mile of this proposed development and she tells me that very little information has been available to the general public on this new development...although older, she reads local media very carefully and has been a long term resident. Suffice to say, she is very concerned about what is not being broadcasted to the overall populace.
I appreciate Cary and Dave and Paula's comments... we need to address these larger issues well before any discretionary actions are taken by our City leaders. I have personally made attempts to gain information at City Hall and only been told "how large this project is and how this deal is being pushed through" ...essentially, information was not available at the counter -- this was last August 2007 -- however, City Council was being organized for a vote prior year end!
Why is such a large development, especially one that has such serious implications, not being more openly discussed and transparent to the constituents of our Holladay? How many community meetings have taken place on this development? please point me to the source of information that has publicized the answers to all of the pertinent questions.
We really need to get this communication string out to our general population and make certain that all the facts are well known. Again, for a $550 Million investment opportunity to only have a few SLC Tribune articles seems very suspicious. Paula, Dave and Cary bring up issues that absolutely need more information, discussion and transparency.
I heard that a Master Plan was approved by the City Planners...is this true and how far along is this development discretionary approval?
Concerned and Cautious
Today's Ap answered the "but for" question surrounding the Cottonwood Mall.
Scott Kiser
Holladay Utah
Thank you Scott for bringing this information forward
General Growth Eyes Major Refinancing
General Growth Expects to Refinance Nearly $5.61 Billion of Debt; Analyst Upbeat on Plan
January 09, 2008: 12:51 PM EST
NEW YORK (Associated Press) - General Growth Properties Inc. expects to refinance nearly $5.61 billion in short-term debt coming due in 2008 and 2009 as long-term fixed-rate loans, the mall real estate investment trust said Wednesday.
As of the end of 2007, the mall REIT had refinanced $359 million, or just 6 percent of its total 2008-2009 maturing debt. It remains confident it can refinance the rest using $4.87 billion in property collateral in 2008 and $5.53 billion of property collateral next year.
Additionally, the REIT said its unencumbered properties and developments will add at least $2.5 billion in financing value. Further, it has put several suburban office buildings on the market and will reduce its $2.3 billion development plans if necessary. (RDA funding for the mall is imperative or we will loose it)
In a research note Wednesday, Goldman Sachs analyst Jonathan Habermann said he believes General Growth will meet its debt obligations and reiterated his "Buy" rating on the stock.
"While GGP's debt maturities may appear large on an absolute basis, they comprise a relatively moderate percentage of the company's overall debt load," he wrote.
The REIT's efforts to refinance its short-term debt comes as lenders tighten standards due to diminishing interest in assets backed by commercial mortgages. A spike in residential foreclosures has made investors leery of securities backed by all types of real estate.
More than $50 billion in risky commercial loans could default if they're not refinanced this year, according to Jones Lang LaSalle Inc.'s capital markets group. Most of these loans are interest only with high loan-to-value ratios.
Shares of General Growth fell 75 cents, or 2.2 percent, to $33.17 in afternoon trading. The stock has lost 36.7 percent in the last 52 weeks as REITs overall struggle with a slowing economy and credit disruptions
If the funding is not approved we loose the mall. Sadly, it is that simple.
Holladay Chamber of Commerce
Scott
I am confused about your posting and your conclusionary comments.
Holladay taxpayers need to be aware of the developer and it's ability to fulfill the development task of the ambitious concept. City of Holladay officials should be tasked with performing a thorough due diligence on the GGP group and confirming that this organization can fulfill the objective. Taxpayers of Holladay do not need to be educated that the real estate industry has been under tremendous pressure as a result of the capital market's fallout...everyday, the newspapers remind us that their is troubled times within the real estate industry.
Holladay should be more concerned about the physical and environmental impacts this large ambitious program for Cottonwood Mall will create. GGP needs to take the time to educate the taxpaying residents about the plans for development and how the use of $70Million dollars within this single development will translate into future tax revenues to benefit the community.
Moreover, GGP should be clarifying how that $70Million will not be going toward other tax benefit agencies(i.e. Granite Schools), but rather, invested into the infrastructure for the Cottonwood Mall -- in essence, to ensure that they have sufficient profits to attract the necessary capital. Very important to clarify is that the $70Million is being used on infrastructure SURROUNDING the development and not being used to OFFSET the normal construction costs of the development. Surely, taxpayers should not be placed in a situation whereby the foregone taxes are being used to assist GGP in making an abundance of profits in this development. If residents of Holladay have truly made an INFORMED decision that they are OK with those redevelopment investments being made within the project, than GGP should be willing to share what scale of profits that they so strongly believe needs to be subsidized with redevelopment offset. The key word in my last sentence is an INFORMED decision, meaning, that GGP and City of Holladay have taken the time educate the taxpaying residents about the absolute needs of this developer and what are the financial requirements for building this new Cottonwood concept. Residents deserve more attention from both GGP and elected officials.
Concerned.
Queenannes’s revenge
The Holladay Chamber is supporting this project based on an informed opinion we developed over a several month period. The information we have provided on this blog is based on information we have collected from Holladay City, Robert Springmeyer (The RDA designer), Holladay’s city engineer, direct discussions with GGP, direct discussions with Utah Senate and House representatives who established the and then approved the RDA amendment, Holladay’s city manager, Holladay’s elected officials and after having a representative in attendance during all 40 plus public hearings. Our opinion is based on our effort to become informed decision makers. As a private citizen we also encourage you and others to become more involved in the functions of the Holladay City government. The Mayor welcomes and encourages public participation. However, Holladay City has already approved the RDA.
Yo Queenanna stop taking your revenge out on the chamber. If you were at some of the meetings, like I was, you would already have the answers to the questions you keep asking. Let it rest Queenie, the plane left without you and now you are mad that nobody told you it was leaving. Utah Law determines how the public is informed on such issues not the city. If you don’t like it take it up with your state reps. Now go have some tea and crumpets and stop pointing out the obvious fact that you are uninformed and it is your fault.
Scott,
You bring up a very good point with that article about GGP finances. $550M is a pretty big percentage of their $2.3B budget, so foregoing or paring back on the Cottonwood project definitely seems plausible in that context. I'm not as concerned as QueenAnne about what that article implies about GGP's overall financials. If they don't finish the project due to financial woes then we haven't lost anything but time, even if the RDA is approved.
You might want to forward that article with a sentence or two about why it implies the necessity of an RDA to the school board and others on the TEC. Especially since GGP is keeping most of the numbers to themselves, information like this article is a solid contribution to the dialogue.
FYI, I spoke with Spence Angerbauer of GGP the other day and he answered several of my specific questions. He said there will be no paid parking. He was more specific on the mix of stores: Some high-end boutique, some national chain stores that prefer people to be able to drive right up to the store, some local ma & pa stores like the shoe repair guy in the old mall. From our conversation I got the impression that the mix will be something like Foothill Village. Higher-end than my wife and I would prefer, but something for everyone. Except he said no teen mall-type store.
He said that tax-wise, one advantage of the mixed-use development, rather than an old-style mall or big box stores or all residential is that they can build much taller buildings and thus get more taxable development per acre. That should help allay the concerns of some Granite School Board members who think this project is too high end to merit an RDA.
He's pretty convincing about the necessity of the RDA. But he convinces through apparent openness and sincerity, not through numbers. Of course, both are valid ways of increasing people's confidence in the RDA's necessity. He was pretty explicit that the amount of TIF was non-negotiable. But I had already heard from a school board member that GGP had offered to come down by 10%. He said that that's true, but that GGP will try to regain that through more concessions from the other parties. :( I say keep working on it and get them down as low as possible, then approve it.
QueenAnne, the important point of the article is that GGP will reduce their new development plans if necessary, and almost a quarter of that is Cottonwood. They have been pretty verbal about having only single-digit profit margins, and therefore say that the RDA is necessary for them to make it worth it. If they're looking for somewhere to cut, we don't want them to cut off this one because it's the one with the lowest margins. Of course, we can't know what their actual future profit margins will be, and I don't think we should just take their word for it, so all additional financial datapoints are useful.
Regarding your concern that this money needs to go to surrounding infrastructure, not to GGP's profit, I wish that were the case. I believe the city will be putting up an additional $10M to do the road work and surrounding infrastructure. My understanding is that the money saved by the tax break actually goes straight to GGP's bottom line. The idea is that the city and other taxing entities are offering GGP an incentive for doing the project because they want the redevelopment to happen and believe it won't happen but for the RDA.
As best I can tell RDAs don't inherently have anything to do with infrastructure costs. That's just the label GGP has put on their particular need/desire for one - the flood plain issues, etc. The real need is to boost their profit margins to a level that will provide them adequate incentive to do the project.
DaveMc
P.s. I was sorry for the rude comments from "yankee". We need to just address the issue and not make any personal attacks.
If the project gets the green light and is full steam ahead, would you pretty please (with sugar on top of it) ask Whole Foods to locate at the Cottonwood Mall. Whole Foods would make everyone happy..... best way to the heart is through the belly! No matter what, you get Whole Foods and the community will rise to any occasion. The best thing that happened to Salt Lake joining the real world was coffee houses and brew pubs. Remember what it used to be like? I know you are rolling your eyes with all your highly intellectual conversing, but in the end, I just want to be happy with my community. Whole Foods!
Post a Comment